PulsingPurple: Let me call you sir. You're my elder after all.
I'll give you an easy exit, sir.
There's a way lawyers and other relevant bodies speak in court, and you can see that all their words are intentional, their points, precise, even when they have their own preferences and personal emotions to display. I'm betting you've seen a written legal agreement before (plenty times).
If we can't try to achieve that here, then I'm no longer interested in any sort of argument here on Nairaland (till further notice). We've spoken before, nothing came out of it. Why repeat the exact same pattern? That's REDUNDANT.
You saw my thread and called for an argument because you have contrasting opinions. I paused to emphasize there should be terms to this conversation. I was particular about properly defining all words we'll be using going on, from God to evidence. I also talked about open-mindedness, being logical, answering what's presented before you.
In all this (like every single one fr fr), you fail. There's no sense in moving forward.
Not like I've even introduced any new thing, I just created some analogies, asked some questions, tried to start clarifying some terms, isn't that HOW ARGUMENTS WORK?... The definition of God as a proper noun is something you could easily Google, the meaning of evidence and the concept I'm pushing is something you could also crosscheck, but only IF YOU WANTED TO.
There's the ISSUE—You don't want to. And that's a very obvious sign of close-mindedness. In the process you dismissed everything you were told/asked. It can very easily be inferred that you're not up for a logical conversation.
See how you directly match the opposite of my terms... the opposite of who I'm willing to discuss with?
So what can I say? NO, I refuse to indulge you sir.
LoLz. This is too funny. I said I would rather have evidence but instead of providing the evidence or even simply defining what you think evidence is, you've gone on this long rambling rant about different things that get nowhere close to examining any evidence.
The problem here is you so whatever you wanna do is up to you.
PulsingPurple: A proper noun is a proper noun, whether it comes from a myth, fable, or reality. A placeholder name for a proper noun is also a proper noun. When referring to the God I'm talking about, it's a deity who has a specific personality, whose name we replace with a simple "God". See how the word "deity" isn't capitalised even though it also means god? This is not something to argue about, I believe you can easily look up grammar. Open-mindedness. Or you simply state it's your own preference and we know where to proceed to.
I have stated my preference. I do not refer to any god with a capital g. So when I am responding you will not see it except as contained in a direct quote.
I wasn't pushing arguments for the existence of gods. I was talking about God, the monotheistic being. Check the thread again.
Your god doesn't get any special treatment from me.
Ahhh, or simply put, your answers will implicate you maybe?
Refrain from trying to attribute any motivations to me, that is not how to have a polite discussion.
Since you've skipped that part, I understand you grab the point and would rather not indulge. But in case you didn't, I was saying all that to say:
1. Your (most atheists hoping for an easy argument) concept of of evidence is/was flawed: narrow, unrealistic in terms of what we're talking about. 2. Just like Love cannot be empirically/scientifically proven, but can be inferred from patterns, relations... Just like you can't provide an exclusive prove for Love which is metaphysical—a concept, you cannot depend on empirical/scientific standards to prove other non-physical things/concepts. You can infer tho, you can imply if you want. This is basic epistemological principle, we won't be using the standard scientific approach to address something on an entirely different epistemic space. After all, we're trying to prove "existence", a concept.
Irrelevant, you have been given the chance to provide a definition of evidence.
PulsingPurple: Not sure I need to define "god", the being I'm making this "positive assertion" about is God. There's proper ways to write out different types of nouns, to separate proper nouns from common nouns, and from different concepts entirely.
Now my definition of God is a supreme being who's responsible for creating the universe as we know it. Most prominent characteristics would be all-powerful, all-knowing. An expansion of explanations will involve religious books so we hold on.
Since we are being pedantic, the word god is not a proper name therefore I will not be capitalising it in any discussion except when it is in a direct quote of someone else.
Ok so I expect any evidence you present to reflect your definition of the god.
Yes, but your definition of evidence doesn't fit the general definition of evidence, it's not extensive. We can go with it though, only if by your definitions, you have "evidence" to prove that love is real and...
Feel free to provide your own definition of evidence.
Okay? I'd like to see the evidences that will leave me with no other reasonable conclusion. (Sorry for bringing your actual wife into this little conversation. Let's take an imaginary wife instead if you don't mind, same concepts).
Sorry but this is too distracting from the topic at hand. The purpose was to demonstrate what evidence should look like. I am not going to go further with this. I think what I have said is sufficient for you to continue on.
Remember, open-mindedness. All this is allowing your definition of evidence to stand, even when we know it should be more extensive than what you give.
Again, you are free to expand on what evidence means.
Again you talk about evidence, you haven't said anything regarding this:
These questions set the table for matters that relate to "evidence". You ignore.
You will have to be the one to define god since you are the one with the positive assertion.
Evidence is a collection of facts that point exclusively to a certain conclusion.
I have evidence my wife loves me. If I gave you the evidence of my wife's love towards me you won't have an other reasonable conclusion. Love is a word we use to describe a collection of attitudes and behaviors exhibited by individuals towards others or towards things. It is very possible to show evidence of love.
PulsingPurple: Inasmuch as that's the idea and I'm a Christian who believes in God, I didn't come here saying all that. I made two threads, one for arguments against God and vice versa. Both are transcripts of a video I saw, not my personal opinion or thought, or a call for debate at all. Picture someone just sharing a reel with you, they don't necessarily ask you to respond or comment, just, “See what I saw...”
All this to say I don't really think the burden of proof is on me, but nonetheless, I've given my terms, and also asked some stuff, you didn't respond.
But it is if you make the positive assertion.
Sure but I am not interested in arguments, I prefer evidence and stated as much in my post. I thought your response to my post was you willing to produce the evidence.
PulsingPurple: Okayyy... You know how sometimes the best of friends were once enemies and the strongest of hates was once love between two people. Iyk,yk 😏 Not concluding, just psychology and a little of history, statistics.
And yhh, everyone should think about what they say and choose to believe, no room for sheep-ples who follow the master first, never bother to understand why and are ready to start fighting for their cause. 🙂
Okay. Can I add that there must be open-mindedness, there's no monopoly of knowledge and of course, every response should logically address all that was presented?
If that's okay, I'll like you to present your evidence instead, seeing that it goes both ways: to you I have to strong evidence God exists, and vice versa.
We can also start somewhere else, how about we address what God is and what even counts as evidence in the first place. There's some posts you made to suggest you're married. If yes, does your wife love you? Is that true or that's just what you believe? Or perhaps what you were made to believe, drawing conclusions from the things that have been happening along the way with you guys? Do you think I will know the correct answer to that, seeing that I don't know what you know? Wait, does love as a whole even exist? If yes, prove? What counts as prove? Or is it just humans pledging to each other in their minds and following a set of logics that they hope will best portray the "love", behaviours that they won't replicate even with this person's robotic clone or twin..?
Since the topic is the existence of the god and you are supporting the positve assertion then the onus is on you to present evidence in support of your position.
It's worth noting that we've talked before on one of my older accounts. Back then I wasn't this knowledgeable and I still couldn't process your points. You've also talked before on these topics countless times with so many people. What am I saying? At the end of the day we're the same people talking about Faith & Fate on this forum for the past 3 years+ at least and no one has been able to convince the other (even Max hasn't been able to convince his fellow "Christians" that JW is the way, AntiChrisstian hasn't been able to prove to us why Islam is the way, you have not been able to convince one theist I'm aware of into atheism).
Conclusion? By "examining the evidence" we'd still argue. All arguments lead to null, not necessarily because we're not presenting our points well, but mostly cos of the psychology behind trying to oppose someone's beliefs. And it gets worse when the other party is not OPEN-MINDED.
We already have good ideas of all points the other party will present. So let's entertain ourselves instead. How do we make this NOT about convincing the other OR showcasing our knowledge OR mockery OR anything in that area? How do we just make this fun, entertaining? I need to hear your rules.
Maybe, maybe not. 8½ years ago I was a Christian, 8 years ago I was not. Sure I wasn't swayed by anything anyone said on here but it made me think for myself. I don’t come on here attempting to make people change their beliefs, I am here to make people think more carefully about the things they say, whatever it is.
As for rules of engagement, I think simple works for me. Present your evidence, let us discuss the validity and the reason why you think it points to a god.
SeriouslySense: It like a distraction. And on reddit, the information on reddit does not mean its 100% correct.
Without the distraction, the world smartest or highest IQ believes in God and in Jesus Christ, not that i want to boast, but i want to emphaszie that, dumbness Or high IQ is not an indicator of believing in Jesus Christ.
He is an example to show to the smart people and enlightened people who got enlightened after several years compared to billions of years and eternity that believing in God is not for the dumb alone.
He is an example to people who got smart by discusing their ideas with others and who got smart after reading some books and watching some documentary that believing in God is not for the dumb alone.
There are links in the Reddit article for you to confirm for yourself. Where is any scientific paper on cognition he has authored?
I give less than a rat's arse what he is or what he believes, my own is don't spread misinformation and stop putting frauds on pedestals.
jesusjnr2020: Dr. YoungHoon Kim, a South Korean genius recently named the world's highest IQ holder (276), says he believes Jesus is God, the Way, the Truth and the Life, and uses quantum physics to back his belief.
He posted on X: “As the world’s highest IQ record holder, I believe that Jesus Christ is God, the way and the truth and the life.”
His post has received 14 million views and a quarter-million likes as of Thursday, June 19.
Kim’s claim to being the world’s highest IQ record holder has been verified by organizations such as the Giga Society, Mensa, World Memory Championships, World Memory Sports Council (in partnership with Guinness World Records), and Official World Record.
Kim, responding to the tremendous popularity of his original post, said in another X post on June 19 that he “will use this opportunity to lead many souls to God.”
“Amen. Christ is my logic,” Kim, 36, said in another response to a commenter on X.
He also stated in February on X: “God exists. 100%,” and recently suggested: “Our consciousness is not just brain activity. It may be quantum information — something that continues after death.”
Kim is founder and CEO of NeuroStory, an organization dedicated to finding “AI-powered brain health solutions” and backed by the South Korean government.
He also founded the United Sigma Intelligence Association and is on the board of Lifeboat Foundation, which promotes scientific advancements while mitigating human risks from technologies like AI.
FreeIgboho: The video is over 1hour long and you expect me to sit and watch it - me that only watches shorts! . But it's a good atheist channel to know.
But, like I asked you before, what if this physical world you trust so deeply is NOT as physical and solid as you think. What if everything you've ever believed about this reality around you is based on a grand illusion? Ever thought of that?
You can listen to it while you do other tasks, it doesn’t require you to sit and stare at the screen.
What if this world was actually made of jello? We can "what if" till the sun swallows the earth, what will always be helpful is what we know and how we know it.
If I ever get to know without equivocation that this wotld is an illusion then there would be no need to believe in a god so I would still operate without belief in a god.
DeepSight: I wrote this back in January when I lost a beloved cousin of mine, however since Nairaland was fire-bombed some months ago the thread appears lost. I decided to re-post it here and now for the simple reason that I just lost another beloved person. The shock still remains the same, but I believe that the thoughts here are only as pertinent as ever and I would like to share the same thoughts again and hope you - one and all - remember again the brevity and meaning of your lives and the purpose thereto.
---------------------------------------------
This morning I took time off work to attend the Funeral Service of a cousin of mine who passed away recently and very sadly at the early age of 47 years. "Cuz" was very special and very dear to the whole family, a generous, active, robust woman full of life and warmth and love and losing her has been nothing short of a bolt of lightning to our collective reality.
We all know that one day we must perforce die: we have known this ever since we set foot in this world, and, as the old saying even goes, nothing is certain in life other than death and-taxes.
Nevertheless we live our lives in a bubble of the present which often blinds us to the stark realities and truths of this world, this time, this place in which we live, and what exactly we are doing here as a race of beings who come and go. Indeed, I would go so far as to say again what I have always said: namely that life is deeply strange: and the strangeness of life is so great that had we not developed customs and legends, and history and stories explaining the great strangeness of life, we really would be all stark raving mad shrieking in the streets wondering what exactly we are doing in this very strange temporary world.
For, frankly, one of the few things that can help one withstand the spectre of death: particularly the spectre of the death of a very close and intensely loved one who is a part of one's everyday life - is the recollection that death has been certain from the moment of birth. This sort of helps us to stay "sane" about it - even when it is a truly frightening occurrence which tells deep and profound truths about the nature of our beings, our existence.
I am motivated to write this because, having had the powerful life-experience of today, of seeing my once lively bubbly cousin lying-in-state - motionless and frozen in death's cold embrace, It struck me again just how precious every passing moment of life is - and I dwelt again on the purpose of life.
Let me say straight away that any person who has ever lost a close loved one to death, and has had the chance to gaze upon the remains of that loved one, will know without any need for questions, argument or discussion, that that corpse that one stares upon, is not the person himself or herself: that it is a casing of sorts, which embodied that person while here on Earth. This is not something for debate: it is a powerful life-experience which people go through: and when it happens, you see it and you know. I first had this experience at the age of 15 when I went to the mortuary to see my father's dead body. I knew instantly that what I stared at was not my father. It was a casing.
This tells us that at death, the real being departs to a dimension and realm of its consistency whilst the material body dissolves into the material as well. Now I am raising this because I really wonder how many of us take seriously the question of the fact that one day, we MUST die? What do we make of our lives, what do they mean to us? What purpose and meaningfulness do our lives have? Do we make any preparation for that here-after, the belief in which many of us profess - even ardently - but what does it really mean to us? Is it genuinely alive and burning in our hearts as our sure and genuine inevitable reality?
My mind was drawn to all the empty, wasteful, boastful and shamefully worthless debates that one has often been neck deep in, regarding existential, religious and spiritual matters. And many other such contentions with people who will argue ardently against the existence of God and all spirituality, for example. Which of these people spare a genuine thought for their mortality and what does it mean to them? Is it not the case that what happens almost all of the time is simply one person shouting meaningless words past another in a bid to show the superiority of his or her doctrine or logic or even intellect? Please do not think I spare myself in this - I have been multiply guilty of such nonsensical grandstanding over empty issues myself. We have all been guilty of trying to argue this or that in a bid to exercise our intellect. The same intellect the material functions of which MUST per force rot in a grave morbidly, in the not too distant future for one and all of us?
The grave truth about this life and this world is that what we need to focus on is the quality and meaningfulness of our spiritual experience in this world: and with our best and most positive energies run our worthy race and breast the tape when the time comes with the assurance that we have given the quality, depth, love and positive passion to our race in this world with goodwill to all mankind and beyond.
Standing in the church today - in what had become a life-event bequeathing startling clarity to me on the nature of this world and this life - I could effectively see that we were all standing in God's waiting room, where the time had come to send a soul back to God. I could clearly see that this world is temporary - and that the real "person" proceeds to the permanent non-material realm. I could clearly see that that realm is much much more real than this one: that we are stuck for a time in what is for all intents a "virtual reality" into which we enter and we exit: to meet the permanent reality that lies beyond.
I could see that we are trainees in God's incubator of consciousness, transiting from one level to another in ever expanding consciousness and ever more aware life, towards the "mighty onwards" of the Eternal Maker.
And so for this reason I wish to appeal to everyone today to "wake up" - to come to "recognition of reality and truth" and see the world really for the temporary school it is. Let us place genuine value on our lives and urge one another to achieve the deep lessons which are intended life experiences, to mark our souls with the grooves of the learning for which this life is meant, and thereby be found to have passed our exams when the time comes calling, and the implacable judges sit waiting for our souls.
I speak to one: and I speak to all. These are our lives: let us hold them - and live them - with the reverence they deserve. Let us dedicate ourselves to things that will edify and improve us; that will encourage and uplift us, that will educate and galvanize us - to work together to put genuine spiritual meaning in our lives and thereby imbue our lives with rich purpose and passion as we march forward in time, on this watered blue rock, circling a red star in the vastness of this universe, and the enigmatic echo of passing, or still time.
May the ONE GOD bless you and yours, now and always.
Please atheists, deists, crossbearers, agnostics, Christians, Musilims, traditionalists, satanists, scientologists, free-thinkers - what ever you may call yourself - or whether you even call yourself anything at all - Feel free to argue all day - but just remember that there must be a day that will come in your life where there will be no argument to be made.
Shalom.
RIP, my friend and brother.
Sorry for your loss bro. May they Rest In Peace. Valar Morghulis.
Image123: Your mind cannot properly process what an eternity actually means, but you are so definite about the finality of death. It's clear whose despair and thinking about death is wishful here.
LoLz. Believing in a collection of fairytales but calling someone else wishful. Bwahahahahahaha!
JovialJune: So how come rainbow doesn't always form everytime it rains? Or you think sunlight doesn't always reflect in water droplets when and after it rains?
There is a religious meaning attached to it, formed for the very first time as a covenant to Noah.
You have to be at the proper angle to see it. If you are at 42° to the incident light you will see a rainbow. Unless you think 42 is a magic number there is no religious significance.
DeepSight: We cant even comprehend the concept. Even if you try to think about it, you will find yourself stumped. That shows our clear limitation.
You cant even allocate anything like a fraction or percentage to it. You can only do that to a finite or specified quantity.
Well said.
Nonetheless the nature of our consciousness strongly suggests that it is merely encased in this body and might escape it at death. One thing that may suggest a sort of eternity for us though, is the fact that energy can neither be created nor destroyed - it only changes form - the first law of thermodynamics.
I included a figure to give a visual aid to point out how insignificant such a duration would be against what an eternity would be.
Ordinary sleep deprivation plays havoc with our psyches talk more about enduring something with no end in sight.
I am not convinced our consciousness survives even if I agree that our energies gets recycled into the universe. I think that recycle process actually shows there is no consciousness after death since energy carries no such traits.
The human mind cannot properly process what an eternity actually means. Our minds have been formed by our inevitable mortality. This idea of living forever is a fantasy than we have dabbled with because it sounds great but doesn't actually tackle how much such a thing will impact our psyches.
Just image if every single human being who has ever lived was in this so called heaven and you met 1 new person every 100 years, by the time you have met every single person once you still won't have entered 0.00000000000000001% of eternity.
I think the whole concept is just wishful thinking from a set of beings that have always despaired about death. The concept negates death yet has no real substance behind it.
Make peace with your mortality, your death will be final.
Christianity Etc › Re: All Arguments For [The Existence Of] GOD Explained by LordReed(m): 10:26pm On Jul 20, 2025
